You need to be a member of Home Energy Pros to add comments!

The style of advertisement they are using - is now pretty common. It uses combines basically three different "important" items into one short sound bite -- aiming to capture the viewer from multiple angles...

1. The ad talks about money,

2. The ad talks about comfort

3. The ad talks about health.

You see the same ads all the time combining those items for cars and other consumer products. They do it because one ad covers the husband/wife and they can connect to it emotionally.

The ad doesn't promise any money - it promotes the idea that piece meal energy improvements are not as good as a comprehensive audit and improvement plan. Some of the complaints you have against California energy programs -- were a result of those piece meal improvements.

I see the ads as trying to make people think about comprehensive solutions - not just going to a big box store and buying a few lightbulbs -- then wonder why they haven't seen a change on their electric bill.

Remember - if you look at the EIA stats... 14% of the California homes do not have heat. Not needed. So promoting heating improvements doesn't work. But some of those same homes may have in window air conditioning units, or un-vented bathrooms, or frequently kitchens that use a gas appliance.

On this web site in some of the "horror" -- I can't believe they did that... you can see some really "intelligent" solutions that have been used for hot water heating and clothes washing -- installing the appliances outside of the house in unprotected - and rather shoddy installations. They worked (sort of) because the climate is mild, first earthquake or nasty storm and the building is toast.. because of the poor work quality (a DIY installation). The EUC PR - would bring -- I hope -- bring some intelligence to the picture...

I think about numbers like that as esoteric, arbitrary, and PR pomp. What I think is more important is whether individual promises to individual people deliver to expectations because if they don't, people are out of pocket the saving that were supposed to help pay for the improvements, which in California case is two out of every three cents. I just don't think claims of obscure megawatt reductions justify a giant fraud perpetrated on the public. I suspect you don't either.

Perhaps you need to look at what the average MWh/yr per consumption by state... California has reduced the average statewide consumption to under 6MWh/yr... over about a 30 year period. Louisiana is running about 18MWh/yr...

EUC PR pitch predominantly talks money savings, even though the consumers NEVER stated that savings was a factor much less primary driver. So these people running the program still completely miss the point and come from a perverted perspective of what matters.

No wonder California's program is poster child for most expensive and least effective - crappiest in the nation. Too much kumbaya singing, pot smoking, green washing back patting doo gooders, and not enough realistic folks with LISTENING and rational thinking skills. They're not packaging EE to meet consumer interests, they're packaging it to meet their doo gooder needs and what they THINK is important to consumers.